St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-09-17

to admit that it can discover or make
any reforms that his administration was
not smart enough to make or discover.
FOR THE FARMERS.
But let Gov. Pierce's position be
clearly understood. Let it be known
that he has taken the ground that rail-
roads shall not be taxed. Let the peo-
pie know that Gov. Pierce is in favor of
laws that shall build up vast monopolies,
hand than they do now. Let Coy.
Pierce's former friends think about this
matter. May we be permitted to ask
Gov. Pierce a fair question? Do You
ride on pass when you take your trips
to st. Paul to edit your department? We
have heard that you did, and ask for
information, you know. I supposed
that, according to the interstate COM
merce law, none but employees are al
lowed to ride on passes. Are you in the
employ of the Northern Pacific railway,
Gov. Pierce. that you can ride on pass?
We must have some motive for your
bitter hostility to the administration of
Gov. Church.
THE QUESTION OF DIVISION
seems to be exciting considerable atten-
ton among the Republicans at least.
Most of the principal features of the
campaign that a few divisionists are
making in Dakota have been presented
and discussed. / wish to call attention
to but few that may be new. The
other day [ was talking with Editor
Jewell, of the Bismarck Tribune. Mr..
Jewell is bright writer and man of
experience and acquaintance with Da-
kOta affairs. In talking over the ques-
ton of division with him, l asked him
how he thought the vote would go in
L
watched the matter pretty closely, and
have travelled over most of the territory
and talked with representative men,
who ought to be posted on affairs, and
it is my opinion that there will be prac-
tically no vote at all on the question
by the North, except where the
matter of prohibition came up, and in
these counties the vote will be largely
against division. There is very little
interest taken anywhere in the terri
tory, North or South, so far as | can find
out. The people that favor division
even know that it will make little differ
ence with the final decision whether
they vote or not, and then there are; a
large number to whom it makes little
difference whether it is one state or two
states.
AN AMUSING THING. i
noticed two weeks ago letter from
Secretary Quinn, of the railroad COM
mission, that was written as an answer
to one on the subject of division by
Caldwell, of the Sioux Falls
Press. Last week Caldwell at
tempted to answer Quinn's letter, which
contained some really strong arguments
against division, and Caldwell employs
his usual style of argument in discuss
ing the division question. This style is
ca M cf< n II fy,, hot -
help calling attention to it. First, he
makes a few short remarks about it
being cheaper to run two states than
one state, and that two states will have
more influence than one, no matter
what their size may be. When any QUE
attempts to show the righteousness of
these statements, as certainly any one
has right to attempt to do, at least,
Caldwell comes back invariably in the
same way and claims that they have not
discussed the question.
IN SHORT 'BEGS THE QUEsTIONo
by claiming that his opponent has not
argued the question, and always winds
up by saying that if the friends of adj
mission as whole have any real argn-
ment to bring forth that he would like
to discuss them. This is precisely the
way In which he has treated Mr.. Quinn.
Quinn answered him fairly and can
didly, and then Caldwell attempts to de-
molish him by claiming that he had not
seriously discussed the subject. This
will hardly work, as Mr.. Caldwell will
find out. The people of Dakota, as a
general thing, have wits of their own.''
and do not propose to be ''told things
unless they have the reason first. The
simple arguments that the question. of
Dakota's division lies solely with con
or "a 40 no ,6r,s hi L
much more cheaply than two states and
with less number of officials, and that
such states as New York have more IN
fiuence in the national councils than.
ha1f-dozen smaller states, are not easily
overthrown by the sophistry of one man
like Mr.. Caldwell, and surely he cannot
throw them to one side by the mere act
of stating that they are not relevant to
the question. THE LooKER-TN.